Posted on 01/29/2010 11:13:04 AM PST by GonzoII
When I so pressingly urge a strict observance of all the laws, let me not be understood as saying there are no bad laws, nor that grievances may not arise, for the redress of which, no legal provisions have been made.--I mean to say no such thing. But I do mean to say, that, although bad laws, if they exist, should be repealed as soon as possible, still while they continue in force, for the sake of example, they should be religiously observed. So also in unprovided cases. If such arise, let proper legal provisions be made for them with the least possible delay; but, till then, let them, if not too intolerable, be borne with.
There is no grievance that is a fit object of redress by mob law. In any case that arises, as for instance, the promulgation of abolitionism, one of two positions is necessarily true; that is, the thing is right within itself, and therefore deserves the protection of all law and all good citizens; or, it is wrong, and therefore proper to be prohibited by legal enactments; and in neither case, is the interposition of mob law, either necessary, justifiable, or excusable.
It does make me wonder what he meant by "not too intolerable"
Liberal family law is a putrid swamp when one compares it to Blackstone's Commentary Book I chapters 15 and 16.
Thanks, Carolyn.
I Moxied it, and shall watch it later.
See ya’,
Ed
Holding God as more important than Country transcends age.
And there was notihng left to say to the other poster because he and I were talking from two completely different frames of reference.
Sadly, I find his reference to be one that is akin to fiddling while Rome burns - the proliferation of unjust laws, and the insistence on some to uphold them, will be the nation's undoing.
Yeah. People don’t seem to understand why we give judges unlimited powers over people’s lives. In this enlightened new world, it’s good for little girls to be handed over to lesbians who bathe naked with them. It will prepare her for the society we’ve created for her. It’s not like this decision could have any permanent repercussions for the little girl. If it destroys her quality of life, we’ve already given judges the power to rectify that situation. If the judge decides she has a low quality of life, he can always follow the example set forth by Judge George Greer. Why can’t more people be as accepting of these recent changes in our judicial system as you are?
1. Laws against murder are unjust, so saith Antoninus.
Next?
(Or are you here to engage in trolling rather than discussion?)
Your post is an interesting take on this case. Why do you believe this?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.